It appears to be bad around town, where I primarily use Urban. A couple of folks have suggested the thing gets much worse gas mileage in urban mode.

Click to expand...

Wasn't that because Ducati just threw fuel at the problem that the bike was unrideable below 4k RPM when it was released? And as this is mainly an "urban problem", it might be that the urban map puts even more fuel in the lower rev range.

Wasn't that because Ducati just threw fuel at the problem that the bike was unrideable below 4k RPM when it was released? And as this is mainly an "urban problem", it might be that the urban map puts even more fuel in the lower rev range.

Click to expand...

Where do you get this stuff? "Unrideable below 4k RPM"??? :huh Do you own one, or are you just talkin' ???

I did test ride one days after it hit the US. And the fueling was abysmal below 4k (might have been a bit lower but not much). I know (read) it was made much better later on with a new fuel map but the mileage also suffered quite a bit.

For someone like me, normally riding triples and the parallel twins out there, the low RPM fueling was nice above 4k, super bad to ride in slow speed maneuvers ...

Edit again: this was the map the bike had about 3 days after a demo bike hit the US dealers.

Click to expand...

And it was brand new and tighter than Elvis Presley's pants.

Have you ridden other new Ducs? They need to loosen up, regardless of the fueling.

FWIW, you'll notice from my sig that mine is also a 2010, the first year model (in the US anyway), and after 12k miles there's no problems down to 2500rpm. I also don't use FatDucs or Bizzaz or any other fueling modifiers, just what ever map Ducati stuffed into the ECU the last time it was flashed (maybe 6 months ago now).

Anyway, back to the original comment on mileage in Urban mode being bad, what I've found is it has nothing to do with Urban mode, but is based on the gear you're in and the rpms. I did a little test a year+ ago and watched the instant MPG readout as I puttered around town (no more than 35mph) in the various modes and the big difference was 1st gear vs. 2nd gear vs. rpms. The fuel mileage in 1st gear was horrible....easily 30% lower than what was shown for 2nd gear on up, and here's the real interesting part....it was very dependent on rpm, and not linear like you'd think. There are "sweet spots". If I remember right, real low rpms were the worst, then it got better at around 4k rpm, then it started to tank again around 6k rpm, then get better again. Part of that makes sense (richer down low for smoother riding around town), then lean out as you get into the "happy zone", but WTF is up with it tanking again? Anyway, that's what I found when I was dickin' with it, and it was totally independent of mode. YMMV, etc.....

It already had about 300 miles on ... Nevertheless, I was never a big believer in "breaking bikes in" as manufacturing specs nowadays are so tight that there isn't much break in happening mechanically with the possible exception of the suspension. Some bikes have learning ECUs, like the new Triumphs, that makes a difference, not sure about the Multi. Other than that, things that actually need to break in are tires and brakes, the engine normally doesn't. But let's not get into a discussion on this one, too.

When you think back, there was a whole people complaining about bad fueling at low revs. Wasn't just me. Granted, I had a Tiger 1050 the week before which has absolutely impeccable fueling at all RPMs, low, high, doesn't matter, even just above idle. You could ride it with no gas in first gear, just using the clutch to do the typical "lollipop slow speed maneuvers". Then new fuel maps came in. People suggested getting full Termi exhausts to solve the low speed hacking and humping. Some fairly ridiculous ideas in my opinion - throwing $2k at a $20k bike just to get the fueling right. From what I followed reading in magazines and here Ducati got it more or less straightened out by throwing fuel at the problem. Bikes are leaned out so much nowadays that this is likely always doing something good to an engine.

Overall - city traffic on a high powered super bike engine that needs to pass more and more rigid emission tests likely requires some interesting fuel maps to feel okay, lots of slow speed, low rev work, stop and go, just lots of stuff most motorcycle engines don't like very much and the race horse engine of the Multi probably more so than other bikes.

So, no surprise that the Multi isn't exactly a gas saver with city riding. It's not really meant to be either.

Mine has a full termi exaust and you can ride it with no problem in every gear BELOW 2500rpm... It pulls like ... i don´t know.. like it should!! I´m guessing not even my v-max pull like that... err.. maybe it does! But the Duc has a LOT of POWER below 2500rpm.. and that´s whem mine does the best millage around town, that is! Of course it does better doing 55 on the freeway...

cug, I remember you slamming Multistrada in your original post, yet you are still lurking in this thread

Click to expand...

Do you actually think before you post? I can read and write wherever I want here. Next, I didn't slam it - I said that Ducati solved the fueling problems that made the bike unrideable for me below 4k RPM by throwing fuel in with new maps. Third, why is it your problem where I read or write?

That's what I mean - it should do that with the stock exhaust. Without adding a 2k system to a 20k bike.

My bike runs just fine down to 1200 or 1300rpm or so and pulls cleanly out of this range. That's what I expect from a modern engine in a "daily use bike".

Click to expand...

You´re absolutely right! But if you buy the bike, from all the extra stuff you can put in it, (i have a lot of s**** in mine) this is the ONLY thing i would buy again!! It´s a diferent bike! A better one!

Interesting. I never rode a Multi with that exhaust. Hard to say whether I'd like it better with it or not. I'm pretty sure I like the Multi with all the small changes Ducati has made since 2010, but haven't ridden one since. Maybe next year ...

Interesting. I never rode a Multi with that exhaust. Hard to say whether I'd like it better with it or not. I'm pretty sure I like the Multi with all the small changes Ducati has made since 2010, but haven't ridden one since. Maybe next year ...

Click to expand...

i can not express the real diference with or without the exaust !! the full termi with the respective chip it's like a new bike!! It´s that good...

Yep. My TransAlp was good down to 1500rpm, the F800GS was good down to like 1800 or 2k, the R1200GS was okay down to 2k. All those bikes were insanely better rideable than the Multi below 3k, the Multi was comparable between 3k and 4k and then left all of them in the dust above that. Depends on riding style whether that works for you or not. It doesn't really for me.